Evaluation of Radial Ocean Surface Currents Derived From Sentinel‐1 IW Doppler Shift Using Coastal Radar and Lagrangian Surface Drifter Observations
Ocean surface radial velocities (RVLs) derived from the Sentinel‐1 A/B Interferomic Wide (IW) mode Doppler frequency shift observations are regularly acquired over the Norwegian coastal zone. These data can be used to complement existing ocean observation systems with high‐resolution (up to 1.5 × 1....
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of geophysical research. Oceans 2020-04, Vol.125 (4), p.n/a |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | n/a |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | |
container_title | Journal of geophysical research. Oceans |
container_volume | 125 |
creator | Moiseev, A. Johnsen, H. Hansen, M. W. Johannessen, J. A. |
description | Ocean surface radial velocities (RVLs) derived from the Sentinel‐1 A/B Interferomic Wide (IW) mode Doppler frequency shift observations are regularly acquired over the Norwegian coastal zone. These data can be used to complement existing ocean observation systems with high‐resolution (up to 1.5 × 1.5 km) spatial ocean surface current (OSC) maps. In this study, Sentinel‐1 IW Level 2 OSC retrievals were obtained from 2 months (October–November 2017) of raw Doppler shift observations acquired over the Norwegian Coastal Current (NCC). The results were evaluated using coastal high‐frequency radar (HFR) and Lagrangian ocean surface drifter observations. The analysis shows that distinct patterns of the NCC, with range directed currents reaching up to 0.7 m/s, can be detected in the SAR data. The mean bias between Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) and HFR observations was −0.08 m/s and the root mean square deviation (RMSD) was 0.25 m/s. In comparison, the agreement between the SAR‐derived OSC and the trajectories from Lagrangian surface drifters showed a mean bias of 0.02 m/s and an RMSD of 0.24 m/s. The accuracy of the SAR OSC retrievals rely on precise wind‐wave bias correction. Hence, the accuracy of the model wind field (speed and direction) is crucial. The sea state contribution must also be taken into account during the bias correction. A typical required accuracy of the OSC velocity is on the order of 0.1 m/s. Therefore, the comparisons demonstrate that the use of SAR for OSC retrieval is promising.
Plain Language Summary
Knowledge of ocean surface currents is crucial for tracking oil spills and marine debris (e.g., plastic), search and rescue operations, and fisheries. Traditionally, surface currents are studied using shipboard measurements or trajectory of buoys drifting within the water flow. Despite their accuracy, these measurements are also costly to collect and therefore irregular in time and space. The Doppler shift recorded by a radar placed on board of a satellite can be used for providing systematic snapshots of surface currents over vast areas of the ocean. However, these observations must be evaluated before application. In this study, we evaluated observations of the Norwegian Coastal Current acquired by the Sentinel‐1 satellite in October–November 2017. Satellite observations were compared with collocated coastal radar and ocean surface drifters data. The analysis shows that distinct patterns of the surface current can be systematically detected |
doi_str_mv | 10.1029/2019JC015743 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2394534256</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2394534256</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a3307-6c7abaec3a945c128e26fff532a9491d5cbc4d96cc2c10cb6166b9912b4da4b33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1Kw0AQgIMoWLQ3H2DBq9X9S9I9SvpjS6HQWjyGyWZTt6SbuJtUevMRPPmAPomrFenJucwwfPPNMEFwRfAtwVTcUUzENMEkjDk7CTqURKInqCCnf3Ucngdd5zbYR5_0ORed4GO4g7KFRlcGVQVaQK6hRHOpwKBlawuQCiWttco0Dg2U1TuVo5GttmjpW9qo8vPtnaDJExpUdV0qi5bPumjQymmzRkkFrvE-rwWLwORoBmsLZq2P9APrB_zgPHPK7n5OcZfBWQGlU93ffBGsRsPH5KE3m48nyf2sB4zhuBfJGDJQkoHgoSS0r2hUFEXIqG8IkocykzwXkZRUEiyziERRJgShGc-BZ4xdBNcHb22rl1a5Jt1UrTV-ZUqZdzJOw8hTNwdK2so5q4q0tnoLdp8SnH4_Pz1-vsfZAX_Vpdr_y6bT8SLxm3DMvgDUkIeh</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2394534256</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of Radial Ocean Surface Currents Derived From Sentinel‐1 IW Doppler Shift Using Coastal Radar and Lagrangian Surface Drifter Observations</title><source>Wiley Online Library - AutoHoldings Journals</source><source>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Moiseev, A. ; Johnsen, H. ; Hansen, M. W. ; Johannessen, J. A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Moiseev, A. ; Johnsen, H. ; Hansen, M. W. ; Johannessen, J. A.</creatorcontrib><description>Ocean surface radial velocities (RVLs) derived from the Sentinel‐1 A/B Interferomic Wide (IW) mode Doppler frequency shift observations are regularly acquired over the Norwegian coastal zone. These data can be used to complement existing ocean observation systems with high‐resolution (up to 1.5 × 1.5 km) spatial ocean surface current (OSC) maps. In this study, Sentinel‐1 IW Level 2 OSC retrievals were obtained from 2 months (October–November 2017) of raw Doppler shift observations acquired over the Norwegian Coastal Current (NCC). The results were evaluated using coastal high‐frequency radar (HFR) and Lagrangian ocean surface drifter observations. The analysis shows that distinct patterns of the NCC, with range directed currents reaching up to 0.7 m/s, can be detected in the SAR data. The mean bias between Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) and HFR observations was −0.08 m/s and the root mean square deviation (RMSD) was 0.25 m/s. In comparison, the agreement between the SAR‐derived OSC and the trajectories from Lagrangian surface drifters showed a mean bias of 0.02 m/s and an RMSD of 0.24 m/s. The accuracy of the SAR OSC retrievals rely on precise wind‐wave bias correction. Hence, the accuracy of the model wind field (speed and direction) is crucial. The sea state contribution must also be taken into account during the bias correction. A typical required accuracy of the OSC velocity is on the order of 0.1 m/s. Therefore, the comparisons demonstrate that the use of SAR for OSC retrieval is promising.
Plain Language Summary
Knowledge of ocean surface currents is crucial for tracking oil spills and marine debris (e.g., plastic), search and rescue operations, and fisheries. Traditionally, surface currents are studied using shipboard measurements or trajectory of buoys drifting within the water flow. Despite their accuracy, these measurements are also costly to collect and therefore irregular in time and space. The Doppler shift recorded by a radar placed on board of a satellite can be used for providing systematic snapshots of surface currents over vast areas of the ocean. However, these observations must be evaluated before application. In this study, we evaluated observations of the Norwegian Coastal Current acquired by the Sentinel‐1 satellite in October–November 2017. Satellite observations were compared with collocated coastal radar and ocean surface drifters data. The analysis shows that distinct patterns of the surface current can be systematically detected in the Sentinel‐1 data. The accuracy of the observations is within the range of user requirements. We underlined the importance of accurate information about wind field and ocean waves for analysis of the radar observation. The performed study demonstrates that the use of Sentinel‐1 observations for the ocean surface current retrieval is promising.
Key Points
Radial velocities from Sentinel‐1 were evaluated using HF‐radar and ocean surface drifter observations
Sentinel‐1 RVLs can be used to provide a reliable observations of the ocean surface currents in the coastal zone
The sea state contribution to the SAR Doppler shift must be taken into account in the wind‐wave bias correction</description><identifier>ISSN: 2169-9275</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2169-9291</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1029/2019JC015743</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Accuracy ; Bias ; Buoys ; Coastal currents ; Coastal zone ; Coastal zones ; Data ; Doppler effect ; Doppler shift ; Doppler sonar ; Drift ; Drifters ; Evaluation ; Fisheries ; Frequency shift ; Geophysics ; HF‐radar ; Marine debris ; Model accuracy ; Norwegian Current ; Ocean currents ; Ocean surface ; ocean surface current ; Ocean waves ; Oceans ; Oil spills ; Radar ; Radar data ; Radar observation ; Rescue operations ; Retrieval ; SAR (radar) ; Satellite observation ; Satellites ; Sea state ; Sea states ; Search and rescue ; Search and rescue missions ; Sentinel‐1 ; Surface currents ; Surface drifters ; Surface water waves ; Synthetic aperture radar ; Trajectory measurement ; User requirements ; validation ; Water flow ; Wind</subject><ispartof>Journal of geophysical research. Oceans, 2020-04, Vol.125 (4), p.n/a</ispartof><rights>2020. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a3307-6c7abaec3a945c128e26fff532a9491d5cbc4d96cc2c10cb6166b9912b4da4b33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a3307-6c7abaec3a945c128e26fff532a9491d5cbc4d96cc2c10cb6166b9912b4da4b33</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4927-1234 ; 0000-0001-7591-9714 ; 0000-0002-6475-5088</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029%2F2019JC015743$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029%2F2019JC015743$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,1433,27924,27925,45574,45575,46409,46833</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Moiseev, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnsen, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hansen, M. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johannessen, J. A.</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of Radial Ocean Surface Currents Derived From Sentinel‐1 IW Doppler Shift Using Coastal Radar and Lagrangian Surface Drifter Observations</title><title>Journal of geophysical research. Oceans</title><description>Ocean surface radial velocities (RVLs) derived from the Sentinel‐1 A/B Interferomic Wide (IW) mode Doppler frequency shift observations are regularly acquired over the Norwegian coastal zone. These data can be used to complement existing ocean observation systems with high‐resolution (up to 1.5 × 1.5 km) spatial ocean surface current (OSC) maps. In this study, Sentinel‐1 IW Level 2 OSC retrievals were obtained from 2 months (October–November 2017) of raw Doppler shift observations acquired over the Norwegian Coastal Current (NCC). The results were evaluated using coastal high‐frequency radar (HFR) and Lagrangian ocean surface drifter observations. The analysis shows that distinct patterns of the NCC, with range directed currents reaching up to 0.7 m/s, can be detected in the SAR data. The mean bias between Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) and HFR observations was −0.08 m/s and the root mean square deviation (RMSD) was 0.25 m/s. In comparison, the agreement between the SAR‐derived OSC and the trajectories from Lagrangian surface drifters showed a mean bias of 0.02 m/s and an RMSD of 0.24 m/s. The accuracy of the SAR OSC retrievals rely on precise wind‐wave bias correction. Hence, the accuracy of the model wind field (speed and direction) is crucial. The sea state contribution must also be taken into account during the bias correction. A typical required accuracy of the OSC velocity is on the order of 0.1 m/s. Therefore, the comparisons demonstrate that the use of SAR for OSC retrieval is promising.
Plain Language Summary
Knowledge of ocean surface currents is crucial for tracking oil spills and marine debris (e.g., plastic), search and rescue operations, and fisheries. Traditionally, surface currents are studied using shipboard measurements or trajectory of buoys drifting within the water flow. Despite their accuracy, these measurements are also costly to collect and therefore irregular in time and space. The Doppler shift recorded by a radar placed on board of a satellite can be used for providing systematic snapshots of surface currents over vast areas of the ocean. However, these observations must be evaluated before application. In this study, we evaluated observations of the Norwegian Coastal Current acquired by the Sentinel‐1 satellite in October–November 2017. Satellite observations were compared with collocated coastal radar and ocean surface drifters data. The analysis shows that distinct patterns of the surface current can be systematically detected in the Sentinel‐1 data. The accuracy of the observations is within the range of user requirements. We underlined the importance of accurate information about wind field and ocean waves for analysis of the radar observation. The performed study demonstrates that the use of Sentinel‐1 observations for the ocean surface current retrieval is promising.
Key Points
Radial velocities from Sentinel‐1 were evaluated using HF‐radar and ocean surface drifter observations
Sentinel‐1 RVLs can be used to provide a reliable observations of the ocean surface currents in the coastal zone
The sea state contribution to the SAR Doppler shift must be taken into account in the wind‐wave bias correction</description><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Buoys</subject><subject>Coastal currents</subject><subject>Coastal zone</subject><subject>Coastal zones</subject><subject>Data</subject><subject>Doppler effect</subject><subject>Doppler shift</subject><subject>Doppler sonar</subject><subject>Drift</subject><subject>Drifters</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Fisheries</subject><subject>Frequency shift</subject><subject>Geophysics</subject><subject>HF‐radar</subject><subject>Marine debris</subject><subject>Model accuracy</subject><subject>Norwegian Current</subject><subject>Ocean currents</subject><subject>Ocean surface</subject><subject>ocean surface current</subject><subject>Ocean waves</subject><subject>Oceans</subject><subject>Oil spills</subject><subject>Radar</subject><subject>Radar data</subject><subject>Radar observation</subject><subject>Rescue operations</subject><subject>Retrieval</subject><subject>SAR (radar)</subject><subject>Satellite observation</subject><subject>Satellites</subject><subject>Sea state</subject><subject>Sea states</subject><subject>Search and rescue</subject><subject>Search and rescue missions</subject><subject>Sentinel‐1</subject><subject>Surface currents</subject><subject>Surface drifters</subject><subject>Surface water waves</subject><subject>Synthetic aperture radar</subject><subject>Trajectory measurement</subject><subject>User requirements</subject><subject>validation</subject><subject>Water flow</subject><subject>Wind</subject><issn>2169-9275</issn><issn>2169-9291</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kM1Kw0AQgIMoWLQ3H2DBq9X9S9I9SvpjS6HQWjyGyWZTt6SbuJtUevMRPPmAPomrFenJucwwfPPNMEFwRfAtwVTcUUzENMEkjDk7CTqURKInqCCnf3Ucngdd5zbYR5_0ORed4GO4g7KFRlcGVQVaQK6hRHOpwKBlawuQCiWttco0Dg2U1TuVo5GttmjpW9qo8vPtnaDJExpUdV0qi5bPumjQymmzRkkFrvE-rwWLwORoBmsLZq2P9APrB_zgPHPK7n5OcZfBWQGlU93ffBGsRsPH5KE3m48nyf2sB4zhuBfJGDJQkoHgoSS0r2hUFEXIqG8IkocykzwXkZRUEiyziERRJgShGc-BZ4xdBNcHb22rl1a5Jt1UrTV-ZUqZdzJOw8hTNwdK2so5q4q0tnoLdp8SnH4_Pz1-vsfZAX_Vpdr_y6bT8SLxm3DMvgDUkIeh</recordid><startdate>202004</startdate><enddate>202004</enddate><creator>Moiseev, A.</creator><creator>Johnsen, H.</creator><creator>Hansen, M. W.</creator><creator>Johannessen, J. A.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L.G</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4927-1234</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7591-9714</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6475-5088</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202004</creationdate><title>Evaluation of Radial Ocean Surface Currents Derived From Sentinel‐1 IW Doppler Shift Using Coastal Radar and Lagrangian Surface Drifter Observations</title><author>Moiseev, A. ; Johnsen, H. ; Hansen, M. W. ; Johannessen, J. A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a3307-6c7abaec3a945c128e26fff532a9491d5cbc4d96cc2c10cb6166b9912b4da4b33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Buoys</topic><topic>Coastal currents</topic><topic>Coastal zone</topic><topic>Coastal zones</topic><topic>Data</topic><topic>Doppler effect</topic><topic>Doppler shift</topic><topic>Doppler sonar</topic><topic>Drift</topic><topic>Drifters</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Fisheries</topic><topic>Frequency shift</topic><topic>Geophysics</topic><topic>HF‐radar</topic><topic>Marine debris</topic><topic>Model accuracy</topic><topic>Norwegian Current</topic><topic>Ocean currents</topic><topic>Ocean surface</topic><topic>ocean surface current</topic><topic>Ocean waves</topic><topic>Oceans</topic><topic>Oil spills</topic><topic>Radar</topic><topic>Radar data</topic><topic>Radar observation</topic><topic>Rescue operations</topic><topic>Retrieval</topic><topic>SAR (radar)</topic><topic>Satellite observation</topic><topic>Satellites</topic><topic>Sea state</topic><topic>Sea states</topic><topic>Search and rescue</topic><topic>Search and rescue missions</topic><topic>Sentinel‐1</topic><topic>Surface currents</topic><topic>Surface drifters</topic><topic>Surface water waves</topic><topic>Synthetic aperture radar</topic><topic>Trajectory measurement</topic><topic>User requirements</topic><topic>validation</topic><topic>Water flow</topic><topic>Wind</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Moiseev, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnsen, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hansen, M. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johannessen, J. A.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><jtitle>Journal of geophysical research. Oceans</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Moiseev, A.</au><au>Johnsen, H.</au><au>Hansen, M. W.</au><au>Johannessen, J. A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of Radial Ocean Surface Currents Derived From Sentinel‐1 IW Doppler Shift Using Coastal Radar and Lagrangian Surface Drifter Observations</atitle><jtitle>Journal of geophysical research. Oceans</jtitle><date>2020-04</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>125</volume><issue>4</issue><epage>n/a</epage><issn>2169-9275</issn><eissn>2169-9291</eissn><abstract>Ocean surface radial velocities (RVLs) derived from the Sentinel‐1 A/B Interferomic Wide (IW) mode Doppler frequency shift observations are regularly acquired over the Norwegian coastal zone. These data can be used to complement existing ocean observation systems with high‐resolution (up to 1.5 × 1.5 km) spatial ocean surface current (OSC) maps. In this study, Sentinel‐1 IW Level 2 OSC retrievals were obtained from 2 months (October–November 2017) of raw Doppler shift observations acquired over the Norwegian Coastal Current (NCC). The results were evaluated using coastal high‐frequency radar (HFR) and Lagrangian ocean surface drifter observations. The analysis shows that distinct patterns of the NCC, with range directed currents reaching up to 0.7 m/s, can be detected in the SAR data. The mean bias between Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) and HFR observations was −0.08 m/s and the root mean square deviation (RMSD) was 0.25 m/s. In comparison, the agreement between the SAR‐derived OSC and the trajectories from Lagrangian surface drifters showed a mean bias of 0.02 m/s and an RMSD of 0.24 m/s. The accuracy of the SAR OSC retrievals rely on precise wind‐wave bias correction. Hence, the accuracy of the model wind field (speed and direction) is crucial. The sea state contribution must also be taken into account during the bias correction. A typical required accuracy of the OSC velocity is on the order of 0.1 m/s. Therefore, the comparisons demonstrate that the use of SAR for OSC retrieval is promising.
Plain Language Summary
Knowledge of ocean surface currents is crucial for tracking oil spills and marine debris (e.g., plastic), search and rescue operations, and fisheries. Traditionally, surface currents are studied using shipboard measurements or trajectory of buoys drifting within the water flow. Despite their accuracy, these measurements are also costly to collect and therefore irregular in time and space. The Doppler shift recorded by a radar placed on board of a satellite can be used for providing systematic snapshots of surface currents over vast areas of the ocean. However, these observations must be evaluated before application. In this study, we evaluated observations of the Norwegian Coastal Current acquired by the Sentinel‐1 satellite in October–November 2017. Satellite observations were compared with collocated coastal radar and ocean surface drifters data. The analysis shows that distinct patterns of the surface current can be systematically detected in the Sentinel‐1 data. The accuracy of the observations is within the range of user requirements. We underlined the importance of accurate information about wind field and ocean waves for analysis of the radar observation. The performed study demonstrates that the use of Sentinel‐1 observations for the ocean surface current retrieval is promising.
Key Points
Radial velocities from Sentinel‐1 were evaluated using HF‐radar and ocean surface drifter observations
Sentinel‐1 RVLs can be used to provide a reliable observations of the ocean surface currents in the coastal zone
The sea state contribution to the SAR Doppler shift must be taken into account in the wind‐wave bias correction</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1029/2019JC015743</doi><tpages>18</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4927-1234</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7591-9714</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6475-5088</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2169-9275 |
ispartof | Journal of geophysical research. Oceans, 2020-04, Vol.125 (4), p.n/a |
issn | 2169-9275 2169-9291 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2394534256 |
source | Wiley Online Library - AutoHoldings Journals; Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection); Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Accuracy Bias Buoys Coastal currents Coastal zone Coastal zones Data Doppler effect Doppler shift Doppler sonar Drift Drifters Evaluation Fisheries Frequency shift Geophysics HF‐radar Marine debris Model accuracy Norwegian Current Ocean currents Ocean surface ocean surface current Ocean waves Oceans Oil spills Radar Radar data Radar observation Rescue operations Retrieval SAR (radar) Satellite observation Satellites Sea state Sea states Search and rescue Search and rescue missions Sentinel‐1 Surface currents Surface drifters Surface water waves Synthetic aperture radar Trajectory measurement User requirements validation Water flow Wind |
title | Evaluation of Radial Ocean Surface Currents Derived From Sentinel‐1 IW Doppler Shift Using Coastal Radar and Lagrangian Surface Drifter Observations |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T12%3A04%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20Radial%20Ocean%20Surface%20Currents%20Derived%20From%20Sentinel%E2%80%901%20IW%20Doppler%20Shift%20Using%20Coastal%20Radar%20and%20Lagrangian%20Surface%20Drifter%20Observations&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20geophysical%20research.%20Oceans&rft.au=Moiseev,%20A.&rft.date=2020-04&rft.volume=125&rft.issue=4&rft.epage=n/a&rft.issn=2169-9275&rft.eissn=2169-9291&rft_id=info:doi/10.1029/2019JC015743&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2394534256%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2394534256&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |